Drotar helps boost Pine-Richland lacrosse team
Pine-Richland's Tess Drotar battles through Fox Chapel defenders on her way to the goal.
Photo by Louis Raggiunti | Pine Creek Journal
The Lady Rams lacrosse team rebounded from its first loss to Peters Township by beating visiting Fox Chapel, 15-6.
The Lady Foxes jumped out to an early 3-0 lead six minutes in, but after a Pine-Richland timeout, the Rams' defense locked down and only allowed three goals in the remaining 44 minutes of the game.
Anchoring the defense was returning starter Emily Thill, Megan Rains, Kim Lubic and Brighid Kortyna.
The offense emerged with a run of four unanswered goals to take the lead, and the Lady Rams never looked back.
Goalie Kaelin Clogan had 16 saves, and the defense forced six turnovers.
Scoring was spread out among five offensive players.
Top scorers for the night were Tess Drotar (eight goals, two assists) and Maddy Collins (four goals, three assists). Hannah Christenson, Leah Reimer and Taylor Thene scored a goal each.
Pine-Richland 21, Franklin Regional 11
The Lady Rams traveled to Franklin Regional in a section matchup.
The Rams came out strong and established an early lead, 4-0, before the Panthers took a timeout.
Key on the draw control were seniors Christenson and Monica Ewansik.
The pressure continued as the Rams led at the half, 10-2.
The Lady Panthers started the second half with intensity as they attempted to rally, however the saves by goalie Clogan shut down the net. The final score was 21-11.
Drotar had six goals and four assists, Christenson logged five goals and an assist, Thene scored four goals to go with one assist, Collins tallied three goals and two assists, Blayne Brachocki scored twice and Annie Kukieza notched a goal.
The Rams' record is 6-1 overall, 5-0 in section play with one section opponent left (North Allegheny) before the second round of section play begins.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.